Cuirassier

createdbyi

It's been awhile since I posted on Polycount. I would like to share something I started a few days ago. I am making a Cuirassier. Here is a little info on what a Cuirassier is if you don't already know:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuirassier

I play a lot of Civ 4 (yes, I still play Civ 4), and one of the units is a Cuirassier... I decided to make one for myself. My goals are to push realism as far as I can, while at the same time, learn how to make my pipeline more efficient.

I made the basemesh in Zbrush, and exported the mesh into Marvelous Designer.

Here is an image of the first pass at clothing.


Here is the most recent image.




When I am happy with the clothing, I will bring it back into Zbrush to start making all the other goodies.

I would like to hear any comments/crits.

Thanks

createdbyi

So, I built a few armor pieces in 3DS Max... but I am not sure if it will be better with the armor, or without.

PyrZern

Well, I thought the term comes from the fact they wore the chestplate armors. Kind of like the Musketeers, and the Zweih

createdbyi

PyrZern, thanks. You're right. Without the armor, he can't use that name.

Docm30

By the end of the 18th century, most troops called 'cuirassiers' didn't wear cuirasses. They did make a minor comeback in the middle of the 19th century, though.

createdbyi

Really? Wouldn't they at keep armor for ceremonial/formal occasions?

PyrZern

@Docm30 Is that when they got called as Dragoons instead ? (name based on Weapons, instead of based on armors)

I think the armors were kept as ceremonial.

Docm30

There were a couple of nations that supplied purely ceremonial cuirasses, but most didn't even go that far. For most of the Napoleonic era, as an example, France and Austria were the only major nations to have cuirassier go into battle with armour.

Cuirassier was mainly just used as a name for shock cavalry. The same way 'grenadier' continued to be used for heavy infantry long after grenades stopped being used.

PyrZern, by the 18th century 'dragoon' had come to mean mounted infantry, something which cuirassiers were not.

PyrZern

Oh cool. Thanks.

@createdbyi I guess it's up to you if you can sell the character as such without his armor.

createdbyi

@Docm30 - Thanks for the insight!

@PyrZern - I think he will look just as good without.

tristanCarter

I'd go without the armor. While use of body armor was around, there are enough examples in history of it not being used that you should be fine without it.

Are you going to accompany him with a horse etc? Also, it could just be the angle, but I'd take a look at the size of his hands. A good way to test it in zBrush would be to duplicate that subtool isolate the area of the hand and move it up to the face. The length should just about manage to go from the top of the forehead to the chin. The width of the palm should be slightly wider than the mouth, but shouldn't extend past the corners of the eyes. Again, this could just be the angle that's throwing it off, but it's worth a quick check.

Otherwise it looks like everything else is coming together nicely. Can't wait to see the results on this one.

Nistrum

ha! Docm30 fancy you cropping up here! hows the mod?

danpants

I think both would look great with or without the armor. I would choose without the armor myself though, nice work.